Yes, this is the year Congress will finally give every American access to health insurance.

Getting there won’t be pretty. But for the first time since the passage of Medicare in the 1960s, the forces favoring action on health care reform are stronger than the forces of cynicism and obstruction.

Feel free to be skeptical. Since Bill and Hillary Clinton’s reform efforts foundered in 1994, predicting the death of any comparable venture has been the safest bet in Washington. But that misses almost everything that has been happening. It’s not just that the public (including business) is frustrated with the status quo. And it has little to do with the details that policy wonks are necessarily hashing over. What matters is that members of Congress have quietly been preparing the ground for reform since Democrats took over two years ago. What also matters is that the competing interest groups seem more inclined to get what they can out of reform than to stop the enterprise altogether.

Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., the chairman of the Finance Committee, has been training (through hearings and studies) as if for a prizefight. In an interview, he said that his self-education included time with Hillary Clinton to discuss why her initiative failed 15 years ago.

She told him that one of the things she didn’t foresee was how jurisdictional battles in Congress could overwhelm all other concerns. If the heads of committees were fighting each other for influence, they were in no position to fight together for a bill.

This time, the bulls are pulling in the same direction. Baucus has been working with Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., for whom health care reform is a sacred cause, and has brought together senators in both parties likely to be part of a solution. He calls them a “board of directors.”

Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., one of the House’s resident health care mavens, has been working closely with two other committee chairs, Reps. George Miller and Charles Rangel.

One largely unheralded change is that health care reformers have made peace with each other. In the past, groups advocating competing proposals were more interested in establishing their dominance than in passing a bill.

“People who advocated health coverage for all Americans wanted it their way, and the second choice was nothing,” Waxman told me. This time, he said, reformers want to get to universal coverage by whatever route is open.

Indeed, all reformers are focused on the same set of ideas, a mixture of subsidies for those who can’t afford insurance, reform of insurance markets so sick people can’t be denied coverage, and serious efforts at cost containment and efficiency.

Ultimately (though not all the players will say so now) the plan will include a mandate requiring all Americans to buy insurance, quelling opposition from the insurance companies. They hope that having a bigger market will compensate them for whatever they might lose from regulatory changes.

In any event, business groups committed to reform will check the power of their colleagues in the insurance industry, and the pharmaceutical companies are willing to cut a deal because they know the current health care gravy train is destined to grind to a halt.

And those with coverage will be able to keep what they have and may profit from improvements in cost and quality. This time, said one influential House staffer, advocates of reform are paying far closer attention than they did 15 years ago to the views of Americans who already have insurance.

Of course, many obstacles remain. Most Democrats think that one of the options consumers should have is a government-run insurance program, but many Republicans see that as a pathway to “socialized medicine.” Yet the momentum for reform is such that compromises around the public plan are already proliferating.

True, Congress will have to pay for it. But a little-noticed provision in the Senate budget resolution assumes that health care reform will cost money upfront but could produce savings later. It would give the government a decade to get costs and expenditures in line, opening some fiscal space for a deal.

Oh, yes, and there happens to be a rather popular person in the White House passionately committed to the cause — so dedicated, in fact, that he is perfectly willing to let Congress write the bill. When the Clintons created their own plan, it arrived on Capitol Hill as an orphan. Barack Obama’s will have many parents.

The president has invested too much in health care reform to lose this fight. So he won’t.

E.J. Dionne’s e-mail address is postchat(at)

© 2009, Washington Post Writers Group


If you're reading this, you probably already know that non-profit, independent journalism is under threat worldwide. Independent news sites are overshadowed by larger heavily funded mainstream media that inundate us with hype and noise that barely scratch the surface. We believe that our readers deserve to know the full story. Truthdig writers bravely dig beneath the headlines to give you thought-provoking, investigative reporting and analysis that tells you what’s really happening and who’s rolling up their sleeves to do something about it.

Like you, we believe a well-informed public that doesn’t have blind faith in the status quo can help change the world. Your contribution of as little as $5 monthly or $35 annually will make you a groundbreaking member and lays the foundation of our work.